State of Maharashtra thr. Excise Department vs Purushottam Rajaram Gedam — 279/2023

Case under Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65E. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 17th April 2026.

Case disposed

S.C.C. - Sum Case

CNR: MHNG100005702023

Filing Number

390/2023

Filing Date

15-Apr-2023

Registration No

279/2023

Registration Date

17-Apr-2023

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Umrer

Judge

2-2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

Decision Date

17-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

Last updated 24-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

200

Police Station

Umrer

Year

2022

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Prohibition Act Section 65E

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra thr. Excise Department

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Purushottam Rajaram Gedam

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Apr-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Summary The court acquitted accused Purushottam Rajaram Gedam of charges under the Maharashtra Arms Act, finding that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that 15 country-made firearms were found in his possession. The court noted that only one witness was examined and critical evidence—including the site inspection panchnama, chemical analysis report, and the person who submitted the seized weapons to the laboratory—was not properly substantiated, making it impossible to definitively prove the recovered items were firearms. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  5. 09-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  7. 16-Feb-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  8. 14-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  9. 23-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  10. 28-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  11. 14-Nov-2025

    EvidenceView PDF

  12. 14-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  13. 19-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  14. 19-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  15. 09-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  16. 05-May-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  17. 16-Jan-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  18. 08-Nov-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Umrer

  19. 23-Aug-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    Jt.civil Judge Jr. Dvn. J.m.f.c.umrer

  20. 05-Jul-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    Jt.civil Judge Jr. Dvn. J.m.f.c.umrer

  21. 13-Jun-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    Jt.civil Judge Jr. Dvn. J.m.f.c.umrer

  22. 27-Mar-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    Jt.civil Judge Jr. Dvn. J.m.f.c.umrer

  23. 26-Dec-2023

    Awaiting Summons

    Jt.civil Judge Jr. Dvn. J.m.f.c.umrer

  24. 04-Oct-2023

    Awaiting Summons

    Jt.civil Judge Jr. Dvn. J.m.f.c.umrer

  25. 05-Jul-2023

    Awaiting Summons

    Jt.civil Judge Jr. Dvn. J.m.f.c.umrer

  26. 17-Apr-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  27. 15-Apr-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 279/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted accused Purushottam Rajaram Gedam of charges under the Maharashtra Arms Act, finding that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that 15 country-made firearms were found in his possession. The court noted that only one witness was examined and critical evidence—including the site inspection panchnama, chemical analysis report, and the person who submitted the seized weapons to the laboratory—was not properly substantiated, making it impossible to definitively prove the recovered items were firearms. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case